Evidence Observed: Daubert's Impact on Science and Justice

观察到的证据：Daubert？的影响科学和正义希拉Jasanoff和肖恩O？1993年，美国最高法院做出了一项具有里程碑意义的判决，Daubert诉Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals，Inc.，这改变了管理科学证据的质量和流向联邦法院的规则。多伯特指控审判法官有责任充当？守门人他说，专家组认为，这是一个很好的办法，以获取科学证据，并确保这种证词既可靠又相关。这个项目研究了Daubert对科学和司法的影响，并记录了法律的决定在法律的过程中转化为实践的过程。 具体而言，该项目解决了以下问题：该决定是否成功地实现了其主要目标：将不可靠和不相关的专家证词（俗称“垃圾科学”）排除在法庭之外？要求审判法官“像科学家一样思考”的效果是什么？道伯特在多大程度上促进了新科学知识的产生？道伯特是否阻碍了有效科学知识作为证据的引入？多伯特促进了正义吗？该项目将采用各种定性方法解决这些问题。一个可搜索的数据库将被创建的州和联邦决定跨越四个“热点”管辖区代表？自由派？然后呢？限制？Daubert的解释将跟踪和分析化学和药物引起的伤害及其相关形式的证据和专业知识的索赔。案例研究将准备两个备受瞩目的后Daubert诉讼涉及证据冲突：苯丙醇胺（PPA），一种药物被怀疑会导致中风的诉讼;和硅凝胶乳房植入物，据称会导致免疫系统紊乱。审判文件和录像证词将进行分析，并进行个人访谈，以提供对Daubert之后专家证据使用的深入了解。该项目将通过存档相关的书面文本，视频和访谈记录和保存Daubert实施的早期历史，以帮助未来的法律和科学研究人员。项目成果还将有助于改善法官、诉讼律师和专家证人的教育。

Evidence Observed: Daubert?s Impact on Science and JusticeSheila Jasanoff and Sean O?DonnellIn 1993, the US Supreme Court issued a landmark decision, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., that changed the rules for managing the quality and flow of scientific evidence into federal courts. Daubert charged trial judges with the responsibility to act as ?gatekeepers? for scientific evidence and to ensure that such testimony was both reliable and relevant. This project examines the impact of Daubert on science and justice and documents the translation of a legal decision into practices in the legal process. Specifically, the project addresses the following questions:Did the decision succeed with respect to its primary objective: to keep unreliable and irrelevant expert testimony (popularly known as "junk science") out of courts? What was the effect of requiring trial judges to "think like scientists"?To what extent did Daubert stimulate the production of new scientific knowledge?Has Daubert impeded the introduction of valid scientific knowledge as evidence?Has Daubert promoted justice?The project will address these questions with a mix of qualitative methods. A searchable database will be created of state and federal decisions across four "hotspot" jurisdictions representing ?liberal? and ?restrictive? interpretations of Daubert. Claims of chemical and drug-induced injuries and their associated forms of evidence and expertise will be tracked and analyzed. Case studies will be prepared of two high-profile post-Daubert lawsuits involving evidentiary conflicts: litigation over phenylpropanolamine (PPA), a drug suspected of causing strokes; and over silicone gel breast implants, alleged to cause immune system disorders. Trial documents and videotaped testimony will be analyzed and personal interviews will be conducted to provide in-depth understanding of the uses of expert evidence after Daubert.The project will document and preserve the early history of Daubert's implementation by archiving pertinent written texts, videos, and interviews so as to assist future researchers in law and science. Project results will also help improve the education of judges, litigators, and expert witnesses.